A Suture Method for Collateral Ligaments of the Finger Proximal Interphalangeal Joint: A Cadaver Study.

IF 2.1 2区 医学 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS
Kenji Kubota, Takane Suzuki, Yusuke Matsuura, Takahiro Yamazaki, Seiji Ohtori
{"title":"A Suture Method for Collateral Ligaments of the Finger Proximal Interphalangeal Joint: A Cadaver Study.","authors":"Kenji Kubota, Takane Suzuki, Yusuke Matsuura, Takahiro Yamazaki, Seiji Ohtori","doi":"10.1016/j.jhsa.2024.09.020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>In a cadaveric model, a comparison was made of the strength of a suture method for collateral ligaments (the N method) with that of simple sutures using suture anchors for the repair of collateral ligaments in the proximal interphalangeal joint.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We obtained 72 fingers from 18 upper limbs of fresh-frozen cadavers and compared the left and right sides of the same specimens. In experiment 1, we examined the rupture strength and rupture sites of intact collateral ligaments in 24 fingers. In experiment 2, we compared the rupture strength and failure modes of the N method (three locking sutures) with those of simple sutures (S group) on 32 fingers. In experiment 3, we examined the rupture strength and failure modes between the N method with three locking sutures (N3 group) and the N method with two locking sutures (N2 group) on 16 fingers. All the experiments involved mechanical testing by applying lateral stress to the collateral ligaments at a rate of 1 mm/s using testing equipment.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In Experiment 1, the mean rupture strength of intact collateral ligaments was 80.6 ± 27.5 N. Proximal tears were the most common rupture sites. In Experiment 2, the mean rupture strength was significantly higher in the N group (46.3 ± 19.2 N) than in the S group (24.1 ± 12.7 N). In the N group, suture breakage occurred more frequently than in the S group, whereas in the S group, there was a higher incidence of suture cut out. In Experiment 3, the N3 and N2 groups exhibited nearly identical rupture strength values.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study showed that the N method had better rupture strength than the simple suture method following finger collateral ligament repair.</p><p><strong>Clinical relevance: </strong>The outcome provides useful information for informing the choice of suture method in clinical practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":54815,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Hand Surgery-American Volume","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Hand Surgery-American Volume","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhsa.2024.09.020","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: In a cadaveric model, a comparison was made of the strength of a suture method for collateral ligaments (the N method) with that of simple sutures using suture anchors for the repair of collateral ligaments in the proximal interphalangeal joint.

Methods: We obtained 72 fingers from 18 upper limbs of fresh-frozen cadavers and compared the left and right sides of the same specimens. In experiment 1, we examined the rupture strength and rupture sites of intact collateral ligaments in 24 fingers. In experiment 2, we compared the rupture strength and failure modes of the N method (three locking sutures) with those of simple sutures (S group) on 32 fingers. In experiment 3, we examined the rupture strength and failure modes between the N method with three locking sutures (N3 group) and the N method with two locking sutures (N2 group) on 16 fingers. All the experiments involved mechanical testing by applying lateral stress to the collateral ligaments at a rate of 1 mm/s using testing equipment.

Results: In Experiment 1, the mean rupture strength of intact collateral ligaments was 80.6 ± 27.5 N. Proximal tears were the most common rupture sites. In Experiment 2, the mean rupture strength was significantly higher in the N group (46.3 ± 19.2 N) than in the S group (24.1 ± 12.7 N). In the N group, suture breakage occurred more frequently than in the S group, whereas in the S group, there was a higher incidence of suture cut out. In Experiment 3, the N3 and N2 groups exhibited nearly identical rupture strength values.

Conclusions: This study showed that the N method had better rupture strength than the simple suture method following finger collateral ligament repair.

Clinical relevance: The outcome provides useful information for informing the choice of suture method in clinical practice.

手指近端指间关节侧韧带的缝合方法:尸体研究。
目的:在尸体模型中,比较了侧韧带缝合方法(N 法)与使用缝合锚的简单缝合方法在修复近端指间关节侧韧带时的强度:我们从新鲜冷冻尸体的 18 个上肢中获取了 72 根手指,并对同一标本的左右两侧进行了比较。在实验 1 中,我们检测了 24 根手指完整侧韧带的断裂强度和断裂部位。在实验 2 中,我们比较了 N 方法(三种锁定缝合)和简单缝合(S 组)在 32 根手指上的断裂强度和破坏模式。在实验 3 中,我们在 16 根手指上检测了采用三针锁定缝合的 N 方法(N3 组)和采用两针锁定缝合的 N 方法(N2 组)之间的断裂强度和破坏模式。所有实验均使用测试设备,以 1 毫米/秒的速度对副韧带施加侧向应力,进行机械测试:实验 1 中,完整副韧带的平均断裂强度为 80.6 ± 27.5 N。在实验 2 中,N 组的平均断裂强度(46.3 ± 19.2 N)明显高于 S 组(24.1 ± 12.7 N)。在 N 组中,缝线断裂的发生率高于 S 组,而在 S 组中,缝线剪断的发生率较高。在实验 3 中,N3 组和 N2 组的断裂强度值几乎相同:结论:本研究表明,在手指副韧带修复后,N法比简单缝合法具有更好的断裂强度:结果为临床实践中选择缝合方法提供了有用信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
10.50%
发文量
402
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Hand Surgery publishes original, peer-reviewed articles related to the pathophysiology, diagnosis, and treatment of diseases and conditions of the upper extremity; these include both clinical and basic science studies, along with case reports. Special features include Review Articles (including Current Concepts and The Hand Surgery Landscape), Reviews of Books and Media, and Letters to the Editor.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信